I guess it depends on who you believe but Mayock was saying during the draft that there were quite a number of scouts buzzing about MoBo. It was a good story but I don't necessarily think it was a PR stunt. I certainly hope not anyway.

mansquatch wrote:
The guy with vast years of NCAA experience that is available in the 6th round is likely tarnished in one or more ways, whether it be lack of polish/experience, poor physical tools, or bad injury history. If that wasn't the case he'd have gone higher than the later rounds. Mobo, lacked polish / epxierence, but has many of the physical and athletic tools you would want in an NFL caliber WR. Why is one risk materially worse than the other, such that Mobo is stupid, but the other guy isn't? If they had taken him in the 2nd or 3rd round I'd be on board with saying it was stupid. In the 6th round they are supposed to gamble.

By the mid to late rounds you are looking at guys with some kind of check against them, which is why they are available. Mobo's check was a big fat one that said, 'NOT WORTH IT!' to me. Loud and clear. Diggs' check, on the other hand (lack of production in NCAA likely due to injuries) was the kind I think it's worth taking a flyer on.

How many 6th and 7th round picks did we have last year? I see both sides, but if we only had one pick in each round and/or gaping holes that needed to be addressed (which I would argue we did, specifically the OL), the I would call the pick wasted. What bothers me more is how the Vikings scouting team thought enough of him to spend a pick on him when he is now as far behind as he reportedly is.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

0 x

The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." ‪#‎SKOL2017 #BringitHome‬

PurpleMustReign wrote:How many 6th and 7th round picks did we have last year? I see both sides, but if we only had one pick in each round and/or gaping holes that needed to be addressed (which I would argue we did, specifically the OL), the I would call the pick wasted. What bothers me more is how the Vikings scouting team thought enough of him to spend a pick on him when he is now as far behind as he reportedly is.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

Related; I saw David Yankey's name on "Top PFF O-linemen" from preseason game 1. FWIW. He plays for Carolina now.

0 x

“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly

S197 wrote:I guess it depends on who you believe but Mayock was saying during the draft that there were quite a number of scouts buzzing about MoBo. It was a good story but I don't necessarily think it was a PR stunt. I certainly hope not anyway.

It sure looked like a PR stunt to me. Mayock was shilling for the league on the league's network and the Vikings jumped in and helped them promote the game internationally (as they are eager to do) by drafting Boehringer and providing the league with a "feel good" moment they sold hard.

So basically you have Sullivan and Walsh as solid contributors out of almost a decades worth of late round picks. Stephen and maybe Edmond Robinson could be good picks, too early to tell but it's basically a list of castoffs as is what you would expect from 6th/7th rounders. I guess we can all draw our own conclusions but for me I'm not seeing any strong evidence pointing to not taking fliers on guys in these rounds. Seems like a big crap shoot to me whether it's a guy from Alabama or Coastal Carolina.

S197 wrote:So basically you have Sullivan and Walsh as solid contributors out of almost a decades worth of late round picks. Stephen and maybe Edmond Robinson could be good picks, too early to tell but it's basically a list of castoffs as is what you would expect from 6th/7th rounders. I guess we can all draw our own conclusions but for me I'm not seeing any strong evidence pointing to not taking fliers on guys in these rounds. Seems like a big crap shoot to me whether it's a guy from Alabama or Coastal Carolina.

Well, that IS why they spend an enormous amount of time and money on scouting and preparation every year. It's because it's all nothing more than a roll of the dice, a matter of pure luck.

Mothman wrote:
Well, that IS why they spend an enormous amount of time and money on scouting and preparation every year. It's because it's all nothing more than a roll of the dice, a matter of pure luck.

In those rounds, it's demonstrably true. If it wasn't, the Seahawks would be finding a Richard Sherman every year or the Steelers would be finding an Antonio Brown. It may not be pure luck but at best it's educated guessing. There's not enough resources to fully evaluate 200+ players, so when you get to these rounds it's likely a tape you saw or a workout you attended where you saw something that makes you say it's worth taking a shot.

Most of your time and money should be spent on the higher rounds of the draft where there's a larger monetary commitment.

S197 wrote:In those rounds, it's demonstrably true. If it wasn't, the Seahawks would be finding a Richard Sherman every year or the Steelers would be finding an Antonio Brown.

That isn't a logical conclusion.

If some of you want to act like drafting a longshot player from the GFL is a perfectly normal, reasonable use of a 6th round draft pick rather than a literally unprecedented risk and justify that decision with one rationalization after another, count me out of the discussion.

Even if they had unlimited time and resources (to some extent they do have a lot of $$$) player evaluation is far from an exact science. They are trying to figure out what a 22 year old will be when he is 25. There isn't an HR department in the world that has that perfectly figured out.

The most obvious example is Tom Brady. Antonio Brown in recent years.

The real question is what is considered a GOOD hit rate on these picks. Are there GMs in the NFL who do a better job than others? The only way to do that would be to look at the 10 year slice for all 32 teams and then calculate the hit rate as an average, NFL wide. That is why I've been pouncing on GM criticism all year. As compared to what? It could be that Rick does suck, but no one does the work to see how he does vs. everyone else, they just complain about some move or moves he's made that they do not like.

0 x

Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

mansquatch wrote:Even if they had unlimited time and resources (to some extent they do have a lot of $$$) player evaluation is far from an exact science. They are trying to figure out what a 22 year old will be when he is 25. There isn't an HR department in the world that has that perfectly figured out.

The most obvious example is Tom Brady. Antonio Brown in recent years.

The real question is what is considered a GOOD hit rate on these picks. Are there GMs in the NFL who do a better job than others? The only way to do that would be to look at the 10 year slice for all 32 teams and then calculate the hit rate as an average, NFL wide. That is why I've been pouncing on GM criticism all year. As compared to what? It could be that Rick does suck, but no one does the work to see how he does vs. everyone else, they just complain about some move or moves he's made that they do not like.

Jim, take some time and look this stuff up. Then report back. I'll give you until Sunday night [emoji23]

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

0 x

The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." ‪#‎SKOL2017 #BringitHome‬

If some of you want to act like drafting a longshot player from the GFL is a perfectly normal, reasonable use of a 6th round draft pick rather than a literally unprecedented risk and justify that decision with one rationalization after another, count me out of the discussion.

If it's a guy who is 6'4 230lbs and runs a 4.43s 40, I think it's reasonable. I have no qualms with taking a high risk/ high reward player in the 6th or 7th that has off the chart metrics. If you're falling to that late in the draft, there's going to be some sort of knock. Being freakishly athletic but extremely raw is a knock I'm okay with.

I mean what "unprecedented risk" did the Vikings take? Missing out on a 5%-10% chance of a guy making the roster and being a solid contributor?

S197 wrote:
If it's a guy who is 6'4 230lbs and runs a 4.43s 40, I think it's reasonable. I have no qualms with taking a high risk/ high reward player in the 6th or 7th that has off the chart metrics. If you're falling to that late in the draft, there's going to be some sort of knock. Being freakishly athletic but extremely raw is a knock I'm okay with.

I mean what "unprecedented risk" did the Vikings take? Missing out on a 5%-10% chance of a guy making the roster and being a solid contributor?

Unprecedented: had anyone ever spent a draft pick on a player from the German Football league? No? Great. That's what unprecedented means.

5-10% chance is fine, but why lower your odds to .000010% by selecting someone who has never played a competitive down of football in his life?

Texas Vike wrote:Unprecedented: had anyone ever spent a draft pick on a player from the German Football league? No? Great. That's what unprecedented means.

The statement was unprecedented risk. You can't bifurcate it like that, unprecedented is an adjective describing the noun (risk). If you're going to be condescending, at least understand the difference between a noun and an adjective. I can come up with a lot of precedents. There have been players in the NFL that didn't play college ball.

5-10% chance is fine, but why lower your odds to .000010% by selecting someone who has never played a competitive down of football in his life?

These are just arbitrary numbers with yours being purposefully low to enforce your point. The guy may never work out or maybe he needs another year on the practice squad. I can think of a starting WR on this team that took a similar journey...

I listed a decade of 6th and 7th round picks. None of the WR's panned out. 0.000000%. It's a low probability pick no matter who is taken. I just don't see the big deal and certainly don't see unprecedented risk.